NEWS ABOUT BENEDICT

The Pope's Christmas gift:
A tough line on Church doctrine
By Jeff Israely

Wednesday, Dec. 03, 2008


As I have been virtually absent from the Forum for much of the past two days, I did not get to see this until today. I thought I had become fairly immune to 'Jeffisraely-rabia' but I continue to be highly susceptible to outrage when I encounter unbridled, unbalanced prejudice by anyone on any subject I care about.

'A tough line on Church doctrine'! What else should the spiritual leader of the Catholic Church have but a tough line on doctrine, if by 'tough' is meant standing firmly for what the Church has taught for 2000 years? The Pope would be in flagrant dereliction of duty if he did otherwise. This is simply creating an issue where there is none.



Those nicknames from the past — God's Rottweiler, the Panzercardinal — don't seem to stick anymore. After acquiring a reputation as an aggressive, doctrine-enforcing Cardinal, Pope Benedict XVI has surprised many with his gentle manner and his writings on Christian love. [But preaching and practising love does not rule out discipline! Have not contemporary psychoanalysts even invented a term for it - 'tough love'?]

But with the Christmas season upon us, there is growing proof that the 82-year-old Pope is also quite willing to play the part of Scrooge to defend his often rigid view of Church doctrine.

[Can doctrine be anything but rigid? Flexible doctrine is no doctrine at all! Again and again, I must protest: How can anyone with common sense fail to see that any religion is also a discipline? And yet, anti-religion ideologues and laissez-faire Christians appear so willing and ready to abdicate common sense in this respect. New Age faddists who 'religiously' follow disciplines in yoga, vegetarianism or what-have-you are left alone or even praised for their 'disciplined' lifestyles, while Catholics - especially the Pope - are scorned for keeping religious discipline!]

Benedict's envoy to the United Nations, Archbishop Celestino Migliore, has announced that the Vatican will oppose a proposed U.N. declaration calling for an end to discrimination against homosexuals. [First of all, the Vatican has always made known it would oppose the proposal. So it was not news. It only became news because two sentences Migliore made to a French news agency were instantly seized upon and twisted to 'make news'.]

At first blush, no one should be surprised to find the Catholic Church hierarchy butting heads with gay rights activists. But this particular French-sponsored proposal, which has the backing of all 27 European Union countries, calls for an end to the practice of criminalizing and punishing people for their sexual orientation. Most dramatically, in some countries, including Iran and Saudi Arabia, homosexuality can be punished by death.

Papal spokesman Father Federico Lombardi was forced to clarify that the Vatican continues to condemn the use of the death penalty for any crime, including those associated with homosexuality. ['Forced to clarify' because Migliore's statements were precisely to explain why the Vatican was opposing the proposal, and yet those statements were ignored by the media in favor of making it appear that the Vatican was actually in favor of criminalizing homosexuality! The headlines in the Italian newspapers were particularly - and unnecessarily - incendiary]

Instead, Migliore said the Vatican's opposition to the U.N. proposal was driven by concern that countries that prohibit gay marriage would somehow be targeted.

Said Migliore: "Countries that don't recognize the union between people of the same sex as marriage will be punished and pressured."

The U.N. declaration does not in fact mention gay marriage, and most of the nations that support it themselves don't allow people of the same sex to wed. [But Migliore never said it did. Rather, that it's a document that could be used eventually to pressure UN member states who do not juridically recognize gay marriages to do so. Israely should know more than most how clever liberals are at devising all sort of Trojan horses to put their pet causes in place and on firm legal footing in society - the US FOCA proposal being the most blatant of such devices.]

Archbishop Migliore confirmed on Tuesday that the Vatican had also refused to sign a U.N. document last May in support of the rights of the disabled because it did not include condemnation of abortion, NOR the rights of a fetus with birth defects. [Not just that it does not include condemnation of abortion but affirms the right to 'reproductive health' which is UN-speak for abortion on demand.]

Vatican officials nevertheless voiced support for the central principles of the disabled rights document, which Migliore helped craft before the final decision to withhold the Holy See’s signature.

The Italian gay rights association Arcigay says the Vatican's opposition to the anti-discriminatory measure is "unprecedented," and the citing of gay marriage is an "excuse" to distract people from the real intent of criminalizing gays.

One Rome-based priest was disappointed that the Vatican decided to publicize its opposition to what appears a rather innocuous declaration. [Ho-hum! The usual anonymous but 'damning' testimonial! Either the priest is an Israely fiction to give voice to his own personal opinion, or he exists but is too cowardly to identify himself. And the media freak show was not the Vatican's idea. Its position has never been a secret. But, anything to find fault, right?]

"When you're always trying to look for new ways to make your point, you lose credibility," says the priest. "Better sometimes to keep quiet."

Benedict has said repeatedly that the Church is forced to speak out against the tide of secularization, especially in Catholicism's home turf in Europe. His kindly manner notwithstanding, Benedict does not seem to hesitate doing or saying what he deems necessary to keep Catholicism from straying too far from its doctrinal tradition.

And that includes revisiting the Catholic liturgy if necessary. His top Vatican deputies are now studying a change to the mass that would affect the moment when members of the congregation are asked to greet each other with a "sign of peace." Worshippers then exchange handshakes, or sometimes a hug or kiss.

In 2007, writing about the exchanging of the peace, Benedict called for "greater restraint in this gesture which can become exaggerated and cause a certain distraction in the assembly before the reception of Communion." It may now be moved earlier in the service.

Cardinal Francis Arinze, head of the Vatican's liturgical office, said last month that the affectionate gesture is often misunderstood. "It is thought to be a chance to shake hands with friends. Instead it is a way to tell those nearby that the peace of Christ, really present on the altar, is also with all."

Though there is no indication if or when the proposed movement of the peace would happen, this change would respond to a desire by the Pope to rein in some of the excesses that he sees in the ways the faith is currently celebrated.

[But why so much fuss about letting people do as they please about the Sign of Peace? The world is not going to have a pandemic of constipation on Sundays if exuberant types restrain themselves to an appropriate expression of the 'peace' sign. Mass is a celebration of God and a commemoration of the Lord's supreme sacrifice. It's no place for a group hug, just as it is not a social occasion, although it is community praying together.]

And to those who wonder why not just let everyone to say 'peace' when and where they please for Christmases to come, one can imagine Benedict flashing that gentle smile, tilting his head ever so slightly and declaring: Bah Humbug!

[Israely's flippancy about the Sign of Peace is out of place. Liturgy is not mindless rite that one follows by rote. It is a solemn ritual, and therefore, it has its rules that must be followed, otherwise it is no longer ritual. One has all the time outside Mass to do as one pleases if one so chooses. For one hour a week, cannot a Christian forget self-indulgence for once and direct all his thoughts to God? Everything else that is good follows from this.]


Here is the right place to post a much-needed clarificatory article by Luigi Accattoli in yesterday's Corriere della Sera about this whole business of the Vatican's participation in UN conventions:





The Vatican has no 'nation'
on which to enforce a UN convention -
and it must stand up for Church doctrine
by Luigi Accattoli
Translated from

December 3, 2008


VATICAN CITY - It has happened many times before and it will happen again that the Holy See does not always sign documents and resolutions by the United Nations and its various agencies.

This has just happened - not yesterday, but over a period of two years - for the Convention on rights for disabled persons.

Of course, the Vatican finds the Convention useful and necessary - "an important step on the road to equal opportunities for everyone", Vatican Radio said - but it cannot sign on to it because it has statements on 'reproductive health' (read 'abortion') that go against Church doctrine.

One must keep in mind the unique character of the Holy See as a sovereign state - it has no 'nation' to legislate over, in accordance with a given UN convention, but its function is to be the doctrinal guide for the entire Catholic community worldwide.

No one is hurt or prejudiced by its failure to sign on to a document which it even recognizes openly as necessary and timely. But it cannot compromise its magisterium by signing on to a text that it does not fully subscribe to.

It was thus in 1994 for the final document of the Cairo conference on population, when so-called 'anti-natalist policies' were objectionable to the Vatican.

Then again, the following year, at the Beijing conference on women, when it could not sign a final document that advocated abortion on demand.

In both cases, Vatican spokesmen present at the conferences encouraged other nations to adopt the 'socially constructive' elements of the declarations.

In the case of the convention on rights for the disabled, a special service of Vatican Radio has been clarifying this double register of formal opposition and practical adherence to its acceptable provisions - those that promote "equal recognition before the law, freedom of expression and opinion, exercise of voting and other forms of participation in political and public life, access to support programs by the State in economic, psychological and health matters".

The service concludes by saying that the ratification and implementation of these provisions are necessary to the achievement of the UN's Millennium Development Goals.



Here's a UN Convention the Vatican did sign today, but MSM will probably ignore it altogether - as they did the significant statement to the Doha Conference made two days ago [posted in CULTURE & POLITICS...] when the 'homosexual' story took up all the oxygen.


HOLY SEE SIGNS CONVENTION
BANNING CLUSTER BOMBS



VATICAN CITY, 4 DEC 2008 (VIS) - Archbishop Dominique Mamberti, secretary for Relations with States yesterday participated in a ceremony, held in Oslo, Norway, to sign a Convention prohibiting the use, production, transfer and stockpiling of cluster munitions, the text of which was approved on 30 May in Dublin, Ireland.

In his address, Archbishop Mamberti stated that "in order to send out a powerful political signal, the Holy See is ratifying this Convention on the same day as the signing. In the first place we wish to express to victims the human proximity of the Holy See and its institutions. We also wish to launch an appeal to States - especially to the producers, exporters and potential consumers of cluster munitions - to join the current signatories, so as to assure victims, and all countries gravely affected by these arms, that their message has been understood.

"Credible security is not only possible, but actually more effective, when it is based on co-operation, on trust and on a just international order", while "order founded on the balance of power is fragile, unstable and a source of conflict", the archbishop added.

The head of the Holy See delegation to the Oslo ceremony then indicated that "through contributions on everyone's part, the house of peace is now stronger, yet perseverance and patience are indispensable for its consolidation".

An English-language declaration accompanying Archbishop Mamberti's speech states that "in ratifying the Convention ... the Holy See desires to encourage the entire international community to be resolute in promoting effective disarmament and arms control negotiations and in strengthening international humanitarian law by reaffirming the pre-eminent and inherent value of human dignity, the centrality of the human person, and the 'elementary considerations of humanity', all of which are elements that constitute the basis of international humanitarian law.

"The Holy See considers the Convention on cluster munitions an important step in the protection of civilians during and after conflicts, from the indiscriminate effects of this inhumane type of weapon", the text adds.

"The Holy See", the document concludes, "considers the implementation of the Convention as a legal and humanitarian challenge for the near future. An effective implementation should be based on constructive co-operation of all governmental and non governmental actors and should reinforce the link between disarmament and development. This can be done by directing human and material resources towards development, justice and peace, which are the most effective means to promote international security and a peaceful international order".